Answer consumers' requests to access information about how automated decision-making technology was used about them

Practical action

Prepare a response template per system covering purpose, logic, outcome and human role, route access requests through the existing request-to-know process, and require vendors by contract to supply what the response needs.

Who does it apply to?

Actors

Deployer / user organisation

Sectors

Employment and HRFinancial services and creditHealthcare and life sciencesEducation and training

Use cases

AI in hiring and employmentAI in healthcareAI in finance, credit and insuranceAI in education

Applies from: 1 January 2027

Which controls meet this duty?

Satisfies: the control, operated properly, does the work the duty asks for. Supports: it contributes but the duty needs more. Each control page lists every other duty it serves, so work done once can be counted once.

• satisfiesProcessCustomer operations lead · once per ai system
  Decision explanation, human review and appeal route

  Serves 14 recorded duties · evidence: Adverse-decision explanation template, AI decision challenge and human review procedure, Challenge and reversal log

  Explaining the purpose, logic and outcome of the decision to the person.

• supportsContractual termLegal counsel · once per ai system
  Contractual allocation of AI duties across the supply chain

  Serves 10 recorded duties · evidence: AI supplier clause set, AI customer or deployer clause set, Contract clause index against the AI register

  Vendors must assist with access requests.

Templates that cover this duty

Generated from the records. Free · no account · links emailed to your work address. This duty is cited in each file with its source reference and a link back here.

• AI Agent Registry and Permission Matrix

  Register · XLSX and DOCX · v7

• EU AI Act Article 50 Transparency Kit

  Kit · DOCX and XLSX · v47

• California ADMT and Risk Assessment Kit (CPPA)

  Kit · DOCX and XLSX · v1

• AI Model Card

  Kit · DOCX and XLSX · v5

All 7 templates that cover it →

What evidence would a reviewer expect?

Frequently asked questions

Cite this record

AIPolicyTracker (2026). “Answer consumers' requests to access information about how automated decision-making technology was used about them (California CPPA automated decision-making rules)” [AIPT-OBL-0120, not yet verified]. https://aipolicytracker.org/id/AIPT-OBL-0120 (accessed 12 November 2026). Data licensed CC BY 4.0.

Permanent id AIPT-OBL-0120: it never changes or gets reused, and its address keeps working if this page moves.

Cite the official text alongside it: CPPA announcement: regulations approved by the Office of Administrative Law, California Privacy Protection Agency, https://cppa.ca.gov/regulations/pdf/ccpa_updates_cyber_risk_admt_appr_text.pdf.

@misc{aipolicytracker2026_answerconsumersrequestst,
  author       = {{AIPolicyTracker}},
  title        = {{Answer consumers' requests to access information about how automated decision-making technology was used about them (California CPPA automated decision-making rules)}},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-california-ccpa-admt-access}},
  url          = {https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-california-ccpa-admt-access},
  urldate      = {2026-11-12},
  note         = {Data licensed CC BY 4.0. Accessed 12 November 2026}
}

Change history

Similar obligations in other instruments

• Give consumers a Pre-use Notice before using automated decision-making technology for a significant decision — California CPPA automated decision-making rules, California (United States)
• Tell users at the start of an AI companion interaction, and at least every three hours, that they are not communicating with a human — New York AI companion safeguards, New York (United States)
• Tell users that an AI companion chatbot is artificially generated and not human, at the start and at least every three hours — Washington AI companion chatbot law (ESHB 2225), Washington State (United States)
• Where the user is known to be a minor or the chatbot is directed to minors, repeat the not-human notice at least every hour — Washington AI companion chatbot law (ESHB 2225), Washington State (United States)
• Publish the self-harm protocol and the number of crisis referral notifications issued in the preceding calendar year — Washington AI companion chatbot law (ESHB 2225), Washington State (United States)
• Disclose AI interaction and label synthetic content — EU AI Act, European Union
• Employers must inform workers and their representatives before using high-risk AI at work — EU AI Act, European Union
• Providers of generative AI must mark synthetic output as artificially generated in a machine-readable way — EU AI Act, European Union